Take the ass, for instance, is it born to be of primary importance? No; it is born because we had need of a back able to bear burdens.
Nay, more, we had need that it should walk; therefore it has further received the power of dealing with impressions, for else it could not have walked. Beyond that its powers cease.
But if the ass itself had received the power to understand how it deals with impressions, then it is plain that reason would have required that it should not have been subject to us or have supplied these needs, but should have been our equal and like ourselves.
Will you not then seek the true nature of the good in that, the want of which makes you refuse to predicate good of other things?
Nay, more, we had need that it should walk; therefore it has further received the power of dealing with impressions, for else it could not have walked. Beyond that its powers cease.
But if the ass itself had received the power to understand how it deals with impressions, then it is plain that reason would have required that it should not have been subject to us or have supplied these needs, but should have been our equal and like ourselves.
Will you not then seek the true nature of the good in that, the want of which makes you refuse to predicate good of other things?
—from Epictetus, Discourses 2.8
As someone who has long had a special bond with animals, I usually find myself in an awkward place, between those who would elevate a beast as if it were no different from a man, and those who would diminish a beast as if it were merely an instrument for a man. Some succumb to their sentimentality, while others succumb to their cruelty, and in both cases, placid reason has surrendered to fierce passion.
While I am immensely fond of donkeys, almost as much as I am of goats, I will not seek to convince them of anything by means of a logical demonstration. At the same time, I will not beat them with a stick if they fail to obey my wishes.
The ass is a creature of the flesh, and it responds to its impressions through instincts, which must be respected as such. I, however, am additionally a creature of reason, and I respond to my impressions through judgements, which are the very prerequisites for articulating morality. The ass does not understand about right and wrong, nor should it. I, however, am defined by my awareness of right and wrong, as my highest calling.
With apologies for the play on words, a conscience proceeds from a consciousness.
Accordingly, when we speak of a “good dog” or a “naughty kitty”, we are using such words in a broader, more casual sense, insofar as we perceive the pet’s actions to agree or disagree with our own estimation of benefit or harm. The dog or the cat certainly do matter, but such value is only apparent to a mind that grasps order and purpose. In a narrower, more formal sense, benefit and harm become possible by the discernment of design.
Just as God’s intellect instills this meaning, so man’s intellect discovers this meaning.
Does this mean that the donkey, the goat, the dog, and the cat are there to be exploited however I please? No, they are there to be of service to the whole, and it is my deliberate responsibility to care for them with a regard for their place within Nature. This is why I think of property as a form of stewardship, not as a form of domination.
Observe how the man who does not comprehend his own dignity is unable to comprehend the dignity of anything else. I cannot rule what is on the outside if I cannot rule what is on the inside.
As someone who has long had a special bond with animals, I usually find myself in an awkward place, between those who would elevate a beast as if it were no different from a man, and those who would diminish a beast as if it were merely an instrument for a man. Some succumb to their sentimentality, while others succumb to their cruelty, and in both cases, placid reason has surrendered to fierce passion.
While I am immensely fond of donkeys, almost as much as I am of goats, I will not seek to convince them of anything by means of a logical demonstration. At the same time, I will not beat them with a stick if they fail to obey my wishes.
The ass is a creature of the flesh, and it responds to its impressions through instincts, which must be respected as such. I, however, am additionally a creature of reason, and I respond to my impressions through judgements, which are the very prerequisites for articulating morality. The ass does not understand about right and wrong, nor should it. I, however, am defined by my awareness of right and wrong, as my highest calling.
With apologies for the play on words, a conscience proceeds from a consciousness.
Accordingly, when we speak of a “good dog” or a “naughty kitty”, we are using such words in a broader, more casual sense, insofar as we perceive the pet’s actions to agree or disagree with our own estimation of benefit or harm. The dog or the cat certainly do matter, but such value is only apparent to a mind that grasps order and purpose. In a narrower, more formal sense, benefit and harm become possible by the discernment of design.
Just as God’s intellect instills this meaning, so man’s intellect discovers this meaning.
Does this mean that the donkey, the goat, the dog, and the cat are there to be exploited however I please? No, they are there to be of service to the whole, and it is my deliberate responsibility to care for them with a regard for their place within Nature. This is why I think of property as a form of stewardship, not as a form of domination.
Observe how the man who does not comprehend his own dignity is unable to comprehend the dignity of anything else. I cannot rule what is on the outside if I cannot rule what is on the inside.
—Reflection written in 7/2001
IMAGE: Joos de Momper the Younger, Mountainous Landscape with Figures and a Donkey ( c. 1630)
_-_Mountainous_Landscape_with_Figures_and_a_Donkey_-_WGA16131.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment